BO Likes Sec of State Putin's Deal
Spanky

Oroville, CA

#102 Sep 17, 2013
Right

“Unions are still scum ”

Since: Dec 07

Atlanta

#103 Sep 18, 2013
Failure in chief wrote:
During the four years that marked President Barack Obama’s first term in office, the real median income of American households dropped by $2,627 and the number of people on poverty increased by approximately 6,667,000, according to data released today by the Census Bureau.
It is a sad statement under the leadership of President Obama.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#104 Sep 18, 2013
Failure in chief wrote:
During the four years that marked President Barack Obama’s first term in office, the real median income of American households dropped by $2,627 and the number of people on poverty increased by approximately 6,667,000, according to data released today by the Census Bureau.
>
>
No matter, most of our current economic woes have been set in motion by R. Reagan and compounded by bush the w.

A GOOGLE search on Reagan and the middle class will reveal the details...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/02/15/r...

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/02/reaga...
Are you kidding me

Orland, CA

#105 Sep 18, 2013
The right is wrong wrote:
<quoted text>
I see infantile mind still has a comprehension problem.
And there is that sucking sound again!
Failure in Chief

Chico, CA

#106 Sep 18, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
No matter, most of our current economic woes have been set in motion by R. Reagan and compounded by bush the w.
A GOOGLE search on Reagan and the middle class will reveal the details...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/02/15/r...
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/02/reaga...
If you go directly to the people who gather the data, the U.S. Census Bureau you will get the truth. You are going to sources that have a political agenda and are giving you their false interpretations.

The truth is found here: http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p60-243.p... and it shows that the median income rose under Reagan.

Please post reliable information sources!
Are you kidding me

Orland, CA

#107 Sep 18, 2013
Failure in Chief wrote:
<quoted text>
If you go directly to the people who gather the data, the U.S. Census Bureau you will get the truth. You are going to sources that have a political agenda and are giving you their false interpretations.
The truth is found here: http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p60-243.p... and it shows that the median income rose under Reagan.
Please post reliable information sources!
The truth? It has no liberal friends!
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#108 Sep 18, 2013
Failure in Chief wrote:
<quoted text>
If you go directly to the people who gather the data, the U.S. Census Bureau you will get the truth. You are going to sources that have a political agenda and are giving you their false interpretations.
The truth is found here: http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p60-243.p... and it shows that the median income rose under Reagan.
Please post reliable information sources!
>
>
And how does the census report change the fact that our economic decline has been set in motion by Reagan's "trickle down" policies and compounded by bush the w...???
TWP

Wichita Falls, TX

#109 Sep 18, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
our economic decline has been set in motion by Reagan...
Really Road Toa d...!

Ronald Reagan...?!!!

THAT WAS 30 BLOODY YEARS AGO YOU DELUSIONAL, NEUROTIC OLD FRUIT CAKE...!!!

30 YEARS AGO...!!!

You know Road Toa d...

You personally do a better job of proving YOU ARE INSANE than anyone else could ever do...!

Keep up the good work "Baghdad Bob"...

http://www.merrystandish.com/dolanloses.html

ROTFLMAO...!!!
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#110 Sep 18, 2013
Are you kidding me wrote:
<quoted text>
The truth? It has no liberal friends!
>
>
But it has got plenty of conservative enemies!!!
The Infantile left Winged

United States

#111 Sep 18, 2013
President Obama: The Democrats' Ronald Reagan

Sep 24, 2012.
With his first term behind him, Obama is poised to be as significant a president as Reagan

If Obama wins, to put it bluntly, he will become the Democrats’ Reagan. The narrative writes itself. He will emerge as an iconic figure who struggled through a recession and a terrorized world, reshaping the economy within it, passing universal health care, strafing the ranks of al -Qaeda, presiding over a civil-rights revolution, and then enjoying the fruits of the recovery. To be sure, the Obama recovery isn’t likely to have the same oomph as the one associated with Reagan—who benefited from a once-in-a-century cut of top income tax rates (from 70 percent to, at first, 50 percent, and then to 28 percent) as well as a huge jump in defense spending at a time when the national debt was much, much less of a burden. But Obama’s potential for Reagan status (maybe minus the airport-naming) is real.
Yes, Bill Clinton won two terms and is a brilliant pol bar none, as he showed in Charlotte in the best speech of both conventions. But the crisis Obama faced on his first day—like the one Reagan faced—was far deeper than anything Clinton confronted, and the future upside therefore is much greater.
The Daily Beast.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/09...

ROTFLMAO nicoliar is the stupidest thing to have ever graced this earth!
Failure in chief

United States

#112 Sep 18, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
And how does the census report change the fact that our economic decline has been set in motion by Reagan's "trickle down" policies and compounded by bush the w...???
What parameter(s) are you using to determine the "economic decline"?

“Unions are still scum ”

Since: Dec 07

Atlanta

#113 Sep 18, 2013
Failure in Chief wrote:
<quoted text>
You are going to sources that have a political agenda and are giving you their false interpretations.
The truth is found here: http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p60-243.p... and it shows that the median income rose under Reagan.
Please post reliable information sources!
MotherJones is the liberal version of Brietbart.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#114 Sep 18, 2013
Failure in chief wrote:
<quoted text>
What parameter(s) are you using to determine the "economic decline"?
>
>
Right now I am merely talking about income inequality....

From the 1950's until the late 1970's the income gains of the the 90% stayed pretty much in lockstep with the gains of the 1% but...

since 1980's incomes begun to diverge to where the 1% quadrupled their income whereas the rest of the country's income level did not fluctuate much past what it was in the 1980's...

Few people making big bucks and the majority of people making peanuts = economic decline.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#115 Sep 18, 2013
The Infantile left Winged

Chico, CA

#116 Sep 19, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
Few people making big bucks and the majority of people making peanuts = economic decline.
So then why do you support communism / socialism?

Check a history book sometime! Maybe about the USSR???
The Infantile left Winged

Chico, CA

#117 Sep 19, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Right now I am merely talking about income inequality....
From the 1950's until the late 1970's the income gains of the the 90% stayed pretty much in lockstep with the gains of the 1% but...
since 1980's incomes begun to diverge to where the 1% quadrupled their income whereas the rest of the country's income level did not fluctuate much past what it was in the 1980's...
Few people making big bucks and the majority of people making peanuts = economic decline.
You are such an assbackwards LIAR!!!

By 1983, inflation had eased, the economy had rebounded, and the United States began a sustained period of economic growth. The annual inflation rate remained under 5 percent throughout most of the 1980s and into the 1990s.

The Political Impact of the Poor Economy in the 1970s

The economic upheaval of the 1970s had important political consequences. The American people expressed their discontent with federal policies by turning out Carter in 1980 and electing former Hollywood actor and California governor Ronald Reagan as president.
Reagan's Economic Policy

Reagan (1981-1989) based his economic program on the theory of supply-side economics, which advocated reducing tax rates so people could keep more of what they earned. The theory was that lower tax rates would induce people to work harder and longer, and that this in turn would lead to more saving and investment, resulting in more production and stimulating overall economic growth. While the Reagan-inspired tax cuts served mainly to benefit wealthier Americans, the economic theory behind the cuts argued that benefits would extend to lower-income people as well because higher investment would lead new job opportunities and higher wages.
http://economics.about.com/od/useconomichisto...
++++++++++

You nicoliar? You are a pathological LIAR!
That only the extremely stupid believe and or agree with!!!
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#118 Sep 19, 2013
The Infantile left Winged wrote:
<quoted text>
So then why do you support communism / socialism?
Check a history book sometime! Maybe about the USSR???
>
>
First off, ours is, always has been and will continue to be a MIXED ECONOMY in which the state and the private sectors run the economy, it is part capitalism and part socialism.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/mixed-eco...

Second, ever since the so called Reagan tax revolution (1980's) the wealthy have become wealthier and the middle class has been sliding down the toilet.

Third, you better do some reading up, not only about communism and the USSR but also the history of the US economy.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#119 Sep 19, 2013
The Infantile left Winged wrote:
<quoted text>
You are such an assbackwards LIAR!!!
By 1983, inflation had eased, the economy had rebounded, and the United States began a sustained period of economic growth. The annual inflation rate remained under 5 percent throughout most of the 1980s and into the 1990s.
The Political Impact of the Poor Economy in the 1970s
The economic upheaval of the 1970s had important political consequences. The American people expressed their discontent with federal policies by turning out Carter in 1980 and electing former Hollywood actor and California governor Ronald Reagan as president.
Reagan's Economic Policy
Reagan (1981-1989) based his economic program on the theory of supply-side economics, which advocated reducing tax rates so people could keep more of what they earned. The theory was that lower tax rates would induce people to work harder and longer, and that this in turn would lead to more saving and investment, resulting in more production and stimulating overall economic growth. While the Reagan-inspired tax cuts served mainly to benefit wealthier Americans, the economic theory behind the cuts argued that benefits would extend to lower-income people as well because higher investment would lead new job opportunities and higher wages.
http://economics.about.com/od/useconomichisto...
++++++++++
You nicoliar? You are a pathological LIAR!
That only the extremely stupid believe and or agree with!!!
>
>
Since your Reagan's policies were so great for the people then why don't you explain to us why is it that the income of the wealthiest quadrupled since the 1980's while everyone else's income is pretty much what it was 30 years ago...???
Are you kidding me

Orland, CA

#120 Sep 19, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Since your Reagan's policies were so great for the people then why don't you explain to us why is it that the income of the wealthiest quadrupled since the 1980's while everyone else's income is pretty much what it was 30 years ago...???
Cliton, Bush, oblamer and stupid liberal policies.
And how about the repeal of the Glass Steagall act???
++++++++++
NOVEMBER 12, 2009.
10 Years Later, Looking at Repeal of Glass-Steagall
Ten years ago to the day, the government reversed one of the key elements of the Depression-era banking laws, knocking down the firewall between commercial banks, which take deposits and make loans, and investment banks, which underwrite securities. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was seen at the time as a way to help American banks grow larger and better compete on the world stage.
But 10 years later, the end of Glass-Steagall has been blamed by some for many of the problems that led to last fall’s financial crisis. While the majority of problems that occurred centered mostly on the pure-play investment banks like Lehman Brothers, the huge banks born out of the revocation of Glass-Steagall, especially Citigroup, and the insurance companies that were allowed to deal in securities, like the American International Group, would not have run into trouble had the law still been in place.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/10-yea...

Ooohhh... poor, poor nicoliar! If you only had a brain!!!
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#121 Sep 19, 2013
Are you kidding me wrote:
<quoted text>
Cliton, Bush, oblamer and stupid liberal policies.
And how about the repeal of the Glass Steagall act???
++++++++++
NOVEMBER 12, 2009.
10 Years Later, Looking at Repeal of Glass-Steagall
Ten years ago to the day, the government reversed one of the key elements of the Depression-era banking laws, knocking down the firewall between commercial banks, which take deposits and make loans, and investment banks, which underwrite securities. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was seen at the time as a way to help American banks grow larger and better compete on the world stage.
But 10 years later, the end of Glass-Steagall has been blamed by some for many of the problems that led to last fall’s financial crisis. While the majority of problems that occurred centered mostly on the pure-play investment banks like Lehman Brothers, the huge banks born out of the revocation of Glass-Steagall, especially Citigroup, and the insurance companies that were allowed to deal in securities, like the American International Group, would not have run into trouble had the law still been in place.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/10-yea...
Ooohhh... poor, poor nicoliar! If you only had a brain!!!
>
>
Bill Clinton, my ass!

Bill Clinton reversed Reagan and raised taxes some and the median income reached an all time high of $56,080 in 1999....

Enter bush the w he lowers taxes and the median income has been on a downward trend ever since...

Chart from the census bureau...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/17/medi...

Glass-Steagall was not totally repealed and there are many, including Ayn Randists,(read T Baggers) who say the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act had nothing to do with the financial crisis...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/objectivist/2012/...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Richvale Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Liberal Dems do most of the Mass Shootings. Jus... 5 hr Porn Star Values 2
Divorce the Sleazebag 5 hr Porn Star Values 10
RUSSIAN BOTS on TOPIX 8 hr THE PHOENIX 5
Michele Bachman says GOD HATES ME! So I won't r... 10 hr Conversion Therapy 2
Oprah Waiting For GOD'S OK 10 hr Wild Bill 6
It Is Time To Arrest And Procedure George Soros... 14 hr Sunlight Disinfects 2
What is Trump so worried about? 15 hr First Amendment 11

Richvale Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Richvale Mortgages